Chennai: Holding that the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, the Madras high court has acquitted two accused, who were awarded life sentence by a trial court in Puducherry in a murder case.
Allowing an appeal filed by the accused S. Selvam and Alex alias Alexander, a Division Bench comprising Justices M. Jaichandren and S. Nagamuthu set aside an order of the III Additional Sessions Judge, Puducherry, dated April 18, 2011, sentencing the duo to life imprisonment in connection with the murder of one Chinnadurai.
According to prosecution, on November 7, 2004, due to previous enmity, the accused entered the house of deceased's friend (Prosecution Witness 2) at G.N. Palayam village, where he was playing carom with him and friend's father was sitting at the entrance of the house and murdered him.
The deceased died on the spot. On a complaint given by friend's father (PW1), the police registered a murder case against Selvam and Alex and arrested them on November 13, 2004. The III Additional sessions judge awarded life imprisonment to the accused.
Acquitting the duo, the Bench pointed out that PW1 and 2 (friend's father and friend of the deceased) were the eye witnesses to the occurrence. Though they have stated in the chief examination about the individual overt acts of these accused and though they have claimed they witnessed the entire occurrence, during cross examination, they have given a go-by and they have stated that they did not know anything about the occurrence. The friend's father also
stated that he did not know about the contents of the complaint preferred by him, the Bench added.
The bench said according to the Additional public prosecutor these witnesses have been cross examined long after the chief examination was over and therefore, the answers elicited during cross examination by defence should not be given weightage of. "But, we find it difficult to persuade ourselves by the above submissions made by the Additional public prosecutor.
These witnesses have not been treated as hostile and cross examined by the public prosecutor so as to falsify the evidence spoken to by them during chief examination. The public prosecutor kept silent without seeking permission to cross examine these witnesses though these witnesses had shown total hostility.
Thus, the answers elicited during cross examination remained unchallenged by the State. This is very unfortunate", the bench added.
The court said moreover, in the very same occurrence, the two accused had sustained injuries but, no explanation whatsoever has been offered by the two witnesses. Even the investigating officer had not collected any evidence to explain the injuries sustained by the accused. "In such view of the matter, we hold that it is too difficult to act upon the evidence of these two witnesses that too in the absence of any other independent witness, so as to sustain the conviction imposed on the accused", the court said.
